I was partly at fault (no helmet, no seat belt). Will my compensation be reduced?

The other driver ran a red light, but you were riding without a helmet, or you were not wearing a seat belt, or you were slightly over the speed limit. The insurer now says you were "also at fault" and offers less. This guide explains how contributory negligence works in Malaysia and what you can do about it.

Partly at fault does not mean no claim

The rule is in section 12(1) of the Civil Law Act 1956. Where a person suffers damage partly through their own fault and partly through the fault of another person, the claim is not defeated by the claimant's own fault. Instead, the damages are reduced "to such extent as the Court thinks just and equitable having regard to the claimant's share in the responsibility for the damage".

So the question is never simply "who was at fault?" but "how much was each person responsible?"

How the court apportions fault

The court looks at two things:

• Causation: how far each person's conduct caused the accident or the injury.
• Blameworthiness: how far each person departed from the standard of a reasonable road user.

Fault is usually expressed as a percentage, for example 70:30 or 80:20. If the court finds you 20% responsible, you recover 80% of the assessed damages.

Under section 12(2), the court must first find and record the total damages that you would have received if you had not been at fault, and then apply the reduction. This makes the reasoning transparent and matters on appeal.

Helmets and seat belts

Wearing a helmet on a motorcycle and a seat belt in a car are legal requirements under road transport rules. But failing to wear one usually does not make you responsible for the accident itself. It is relevant only to the injuries:

• If a head injury would have been avoided or less serious with a helmet, the court may reduce damages for that injury.
• If your injury would have happened anyway (for example a leg fracture in a motorcycle crash), the missing helmet may make little or no difference.

The burden is on the defendant to prove contributory negligence, including the link between the missing helmet or seat belt and the harm. Medical evidence often decides this point.

Have a question about your own situation? Ask on WhatsApp

Other common arguments

Insurers often argue contributory negligence where the claimant:

• was speeding or did not keep a proper lookout;
• crossed the road away from a pedestrian crossing;
• rode in the wrong lane or without lights at night;
• was a passenger who knowingly travelled with a drunk driver.

Each argument must be proved with evidence, not assumed. The sketch plan, photographs, dashcam footage, the police investigation result and independent witnesses are important.

Fatal accidents

If the person who died was partly at fault, the damages in a dependency claim by the family under section 7 are reduced in the same proportion (section 12(4)). So the apportionment issue matters to families as much as to injured claimants.

What should I do first?

1. Lodge a police report with your account of how the accident happened.
2. Keep the evidence: dashcam, photos of the scene, damage to both vehicles, your helmet if you wore one.
3. Get the police sketch plan and investigation outcome when available.
4. Record witnesses' names and phone numbers.
5. Do not admit fault in writing to the insurer before taking advice.

Example

A motorcyclist is hit by a car turning right across his path. He was riding at a moderate speed but his helmet strap was not fastened, and the helmet came off. He suffers a head injury and a broken wrist. The court finds the driver mainly to blame for the accident, but reduces damages for the head injury only, after medical evidence shows that a fastened helmet would probably have reduced it. The wrist injury damages are not reduced.

Common mistakes

• Assuming you cannot claim because you were "also wrong".
• Accepting the insurer's percentage without asking for the evidence behind it.
• Throwing away a damaged helmet or other physical evidence.
• Signing a statement that says the accident was "both our faults".

When to speak to a lawyer

Speak to a lawyer if the insurer says you were partly at fault, or if the percentage offered seems too high. See our civil litigation page; you can also contact us.

Frequently asked questions

Can I be found 100% at fault?

Yes, if the evidence shows the accident was caused entirely by you. Then the claim fails. But where both sides contributed, damages are apportioned.

Is the percentage agreed or decided by the court?

It can be agreed in settlement. If not agreed, the court decides it after hearing the evidence.

How long do I have to sue?

A personal injury claim is generally subject to six years from the accident under section 6(1)(a) of the Limitation Act 1953. A claim against a public authority may have a shorter period.

Sources & fact check

Legal points in this article were checked against the primary sources below. The law can change; this is general information, not legal advice.

1. Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 67), including sections 7, 8, 12 and 28A, AGC Laws of Malaysia
2. Limitation Act 1953 (Act 254), including section 6, AGC Laws of Malaysia
3. Road Transport Act 1987 (Act 333), as amended by Act A1618 (2020), AGC Laws of Malaysia
4. Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM): how to make a police report, including road accident reports under section 52 of the Road Transport Act 1987

Fact-checked on 18 Oct 2026